The
appellant, the Louisiana Board of Pharmacy (the Board),
appeals the trial court's judgment granting the
defendants-appellees, Gachassin Law Firm and Julie Ann
Savoy's (Gachassin), motion to compel the Board to
provide a physician's login and search history of the
prescription monitoring program (PMP). For the following
reasons, we affirm.

FACTUAL
AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

Dr.
Derrick Dean was sued by the family of Kenneth Scully
following Scully's death after admission to the emergency
room in which Dr. Dean was working. Dr. Dean employed the
Gachassin Law Firm, for whom Savoy is employed as an
attorney, to defend him from the medical malpractice suit
filed against him. However, before the medical review panel
convened, the matter was settled with Scully's family for
$450, 000.

Thereafter,
Dr. Dean sued Gachassin for legal malpractice. Gachassin
sought to compel the Board to "disclose the date, time
and portal location of Dr. Dean's access of the online
database concerning Mr. Scully for the time period of 2013
through the present date." The PMP is a repository of
information collected by the Board that monitors the
dispensation of controlled substances and other drugs of
concern in the state. Gachassin sought the information for
purposes of showing inconsistencies in the times Dr. Dean
claimed to have accessed the database relative to the
settlement reached with Scully's family.

The
trial court granted Gachassin's motion to compel. The
Board filed a supervisory writ with this court in 16-1064.
The Board also filed the instant appeal seeking reversal of
the trial court's grant of the motion to compel. We have
consolidated the writ application and appeal. The Board's
sole assignment of error is that the trial court erred in
granting the motion to compel filed by Gachassin.

DISCUSSION

This
case presents a question of law: Whether a physician's
login time, portal location, and search history of an
individual patient qualifies as "prescription monitoring
information" subject to the limitations of La.R.S.
40:1007, an issue of first consideration. The trial court
reasoned that the login information did not qualify as
"prescription monitoring information" as follows:

But here what they're looking for is the information only
upon when the doctor accessed the program. When did he open
the door? I'm not looking for any information in the
closet; they just want to know when he opened the door.

A. Except as provided in Subsections C, D, E, F, G, H, and I
of this Section, prescription monitoring information
submitted to the board shall be protected health
information, not subject to public or open records law,
including but not limited to R.S. 44:1 et seq., and not
subject to disclosure. Prescription monitoring
information shall not be available for civil subpoena from
the board nor shall such information be disclosed,
discoverable, or compelled to be produced in any civil
proceeding nor shall such records be deemed admissible as
evidence in any civil proceeding for any reason.
Notwithstanding this provision, law enforcement and
professional licensing, certification, or regulatory agencies
may utilize prescription monitoring information in the course
of any investigation and subsequent criminal and
administrative proceedings, but only in accordance with
federal and state law and the requirements of this Part.

B. The board shall maintain procedures to ensure that the
privacy and confidentiality of patients and patient
information collected, recorded, transmitted, and
maintained is not disclosed to persons or entities except as
in Subsections C, D, E, F, G, H, and I of this Section.

C. The board shall review the prescription monitoring
information. If there is reasonable suspicion to believe a
breach of professional or occupational standards may have
occurred, the board shall notify the appropriate professional
licensing agency with jurisdiction over prescribers or
dispensers and shall provide prescription monitoring
information required for an investigation.

D. The board shall provide prescription monitoring
information to public or private entities, whether located in
or outside of the state, for public research, policy, or
educational purposes, but only after removing information
that identifies or could be reasonably used to identify
prescribers, dispensers, and individual patients or persons
who received prescriptions from prescribers.

E. The following persons, after successful completion of the
educational courses identified in R.S. 40:1008, may access
prescription monitoring information at no cost and in the
same or similar manner, and for the same or similar purposes,
as those persons are authorized to access similar protected
health information under federal and state law and
regulation:

(1) Persons authorized to prescribe or dispense controlled
substances or drugs of concern, or their delegates as defined
by rule, for the purpose of providing medical or
pharmaceutical care for their patients, or for verifying
their prescribing records.

(2) Designated representatives from the professional
licensing, certification, or regulatory agencies of this
state or another state charged with administrative oversight
of those professionals engaged in the prescribing or
dispensing of controlled substances or other drugs of
concern.

(3) Designated representatives from the Louisiana Medicaid
program regarding Medicaid program recipients.

(4) Designated representatives of the board and any vendor or
contractor establishing or maintaining the prescription
monitoring program.

F. The board may provide a report containing prescription
monitoring information upon application of local, state,
out-of-state, and federal law enforcement or prosecutorial
officials engaged in the administration, investigation, or
enforcement of the laws governing controlled substances or
other drugs of concern in ...

Our website includes the first part of the main text of the court's opinion.
To read the entire case, you must purchase the decision for download. With purchase,
you also receive any available docket numbers, case citations or footnotes, dissents
and concurrences that accompany the decision.
Docket numbers and/or citations allow you to research a case further or to use a case in a
legal proceeding. Footnotes (if any) include details of the court's decision. If the document contains a simple affirmation or denial without discussion,
there may not be additional text.

Buy This Entire Record For
$7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.